The Sunday herald and weekly national intelligencer. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1887-1896, 1887-03-20
ENcoKES.


The editor of the Era, Q.ondon, in an article
on encores, says: 1--WE feel that there is some.
thing almost Quixotic In attacking the encore
system. Encores are an abuse OF such long
standing that II would seem useless to hope
that they will ever be done away with alto.
gcther but this idea is not so utopian as II at first
sight appears. Every innovation is certain to DO
received with disfavor at first; and, II It's advo-
cacy be not persevered ill., the RVS inertia which
pervades all the different departments OF hui
man life becomes victorious over tho reforming
spirit. But when any reform In matters theat-
rical has found n supporter sufficiently vigor
Gus TO fight Its battles Professionally the public
has In the end acquiesced In the innovation
The abolition of fees In theatres, the prohibition
by Mr.. Cave of calls before the curtain at his
theatre, the purging of the 'lobbics' of the old
London houses of their disreputablc frequent
ers, aud the successful resistance of Mr.. Sims
Reeves to the encore nuisance are Ito take
few instances at randoin) cases In point. The
common sense argument against an encore is
that II is absurd to expect more for ones money
than one has paid for. baker will not encore
his delivery of loaf of bread, nor n butcher
cut off two chops for the same amount of
money In answer to cry of DIS. This is per-
fectly logical aud uncontrovertiblc contention.
But IL is not all that is to be said against en-
cores. Not only are they attempts to obtain
more value than has been purchased, but they
exhaust the energies of the audience. 1t is
quite n common thing for persons to visit the
atIc where an opera is being performed time
after time, ON each fresh hearing discovering
new beauties In the music.
"Even upon the most enthusiastic patrons of
these theatres cncores have an effect unfavor
able to the interests of the management.
person hears an air for the first time, and
straightway is struck by It's melodious beauty.
II II is not repeated at the time he rises from
his musical banquet with an appetite, SO far as
that particular number Is concerned. and so
with respect TO others in the opera. But II each
of the so-called popular airs is repeated, or,
snI ss.t, hnar
again that particular opera is very likely
qiienched Whatever may be the other factors
of the success of the entertainment of the
Moore and Burgess Minstrels, one cause is GER
tainly likely to have contributed to the popu-
lnrity of their concerts. Encores, II not nbso
lutely forbidden, are earnestly discouraged,
and the different details of the performance
| accordingly follow each other without break or
hindrancc. the result being that there is NO
chance of a minority of the audience being
forced to listen to repettions against their will
at the request of greedy majority. Novelty
and freshness are important factors OF the en-
joyment we derive from work of art. 1t is,
| indeed, moot point whether the issue of the
score of an opera during its performance,
profitable Ms the publication may be, does not
injure the receipts at the theatre where the
opera is being performed. and whether the pro
prietors Of piano and barrel organs ought TO be
allowed to do to denth every successful must
cal composition soon after It appears We can
| all call to mind airs, delightful In themselves
which have come positively to na,iseate us
through our having heard them over and over
again wherever we may have gone, and the
| same is the case with the strumming of the
music on every piano in the kingdom which
takes place when the pianoforte edition of a
new opera is issued. But the composer derives
| profit from the sale of the copyright in his
| work, while he gets nothing in return for the
| repctitions of portions of IL gratis, which are
| caused by cncores
1.-The principal difficulty in getting rid of this
abuse is the natural rivalry Of singers In this
spect. An encore, even IL II be only half gen
the performance, and passes as n tribute to the
talent of the singer. whose performance had
to be repeated The immodesty, almost
amounting to impertinence, with which a very
moderate amount of applause is sometimes
taken us n demand for n repetition is notorious.
| IL is hopeless to expect, except In the case of
an artist like MIR. Sims Reeves, whose reputa-
ton is founded on rock that cannot be
shaken, that individual singers will resist the
temptation of an encore. The only way In
| which the nuisance can be removed is by n
fixed and unalterable regulation made by the
management and stated In the programmes.
| In the case of every reform section of the
public is certain to wax resistful; but persever-
ance on the part of those in authority would
| have the desired effect, and their patrons would
soon come to acknowledge the wisdom of the
rule and the desirabilty of its application.
at does indeed seem hopeless TO expect any
| immediate Improvement In the state OF things
as regards encores. But that should not pre-
desirable practice. The few attempts that
| have been made In the direction of reform have
| been only partially successful, hut II the OK
ample thus set and the ventilation Of the sub
| ject I'm our columns and elsewhere only encour-
age those who are endeayoring to abolish the
encore system, we shall not have written, and
Mr.. Sims Reeves and others VIII not have taken
action, altogether In vain"